951and944S

Agree 100% with Dave re. aero vs stock.

My son caught and passed probably the most aero developed SP3 car in a bone stock 968 with half the stock rear wing parts missing.

Didn't even have a front splitter and the factory batwing was missing from the car.

Drag can be detrimental.



T

944Cup

A SP3 driver has proposed to PCA that their be a weight reduction across the board for SP3. PCA is in favor of a reduction in general.

The proposal is intended to reduce the amount of ballast which highly lightened cars need, reducing the risk of ballast getting loose in a crash.

IMO: While in general the idea of improving is desirable, the weight changes being considered would make the 944S model weight virtually impossible to achieve at 2415 lbs. This basically makes the S model a non-factor in the class. Given that achieving this proposed weight would be impossible, the make the S model would be uncompetitive. Something needs to be done to resolve the S issue if these new weights are yo be adopted.

Secondly, the weight for the 968 is being lowered more than all the other models except the Turbo S which has the same drop. Problem is the 968 has become the favored model and most often seems to have an edge over the other models. If anything, the 968 should receive the least of the weight reductions to help balance the field.

Lastly, dropping the weight of the sp3 cars does not mean the cars will car less ballast, the intended outcome, unless you set a maximum weight of ballast that can be carried in any class and Model car in PCA club racing.

These cars came from the factory significantly heavier than the current race weights. Drivers lowered the weight of these cars further than needed and then added ballast to reposition the the weight of the car for the purpose of improving the balance and lowering the center of gravity.

If concerned about the safety of carrying too much ballast, then you need to set a limit on ballast that can be carried, and for all classes and not just sp3 .

The proposal continues to be considered by PCA.

944Cup

Proposed Reduced SP3 weights as I sent back to PCA as follows:


Model/ Current weight/ New weight



944S/ 2500 /xxxxx (eliminate from class)


944S2 /2700 /2600

951/ 2800 / 2700

951S/ 3000/ 2950

968/ 2900/ 2850

Agena

I'm running a 1989 944 S2, I'm doing my best to get the car down to 2700 with me in it (I'm 210 with gear). Fiberglass hood, rear bumper, and fiberglass sunroof. I do use a cool suit so that's weight that I could lose but dropping another 100 pounds would be difficult. I might be able to make 2650. So the question is, is 2020 going to continue with the 2019 weights or is the plan to further decrease the minimums?

944Cup

Thank you for the input Ken. Your concern is one I have had since I first saw the proposal to drop the SP3 weights. Good to hear from a driver. Nothing has been decided yet for 2020. I will share your concerns with PCA officials making the decisions.

If drivers in the models in class with lower weight minimums, further lowering the weights would disadvantage these models over the heavier more powerful models, given that models like the 968 and the TurboS have the room to take advantage of their drops. At this point, I would say the power to weight ratios may already be slightly in favor of the more powerful models. We don't want to disrupt the balance in the class.

944Cup

Given the intended reasoning for such as proposed change was safety, more and more I think about this proposal, I believe the solution is for better define the manner in which ballast is secured in a car rather than dropping the minimum weights.

The first step would be to ensure ballast is safely installed in a race car and begin with specs for adding ballast to a race car, given the real concern here was ballast flying around inside a race car.

Here is a proposed suggestion submitted to include Ballast Specs for PCA club racing, not just SP3, similar to safety provisions included in the rules for roll cages, seat belts, etc. Adding weight should not be a free-for-all:

BALLAST
All ballast shall be solid metal such as steel or lead, and consist of a minimum of five (5) pounds per piece. Each piece shall be bolted in place with through-bolts, fender washers, and a locking-nut / system (e.g. jam-nuts, Nylock, etc.). All ballast shall be secured sufficiently, and all bolts shall be of grade five (5) along with commensurate washers and lock nut sytems. Nylock nuts or metal crimping lock nuts cannot be reused.

Maximum of two hundred and fifty (250) lbs. of added ballast. All ballast must be safely secured on the floor of the car in any location inside the vehicle or trunk compartment and approved by PCA safety technical inspectors. At a minimum, use at least one (1) 3/8-inch grade-5 bolt, two (2) “fender” washers and a locking nut system for every fifteen (15) pounds of weight. Because of the amount of weight and the thinness of a floor pan or body panels, steel plates must be used to reinforce the floor pan underneath the car if the ballast in any given area exceeds 95 lbs.

The boy

Personally I think there should be a little more incentive for people to keep running the turbos. As more and more people are giving up on them (because they either believe they are not competitive or reliably reasons) and switching to S2 or 968 power those cars are clearly the dominant cars. When was the last time a turbo won in sp3 in a full grid? Especially somewhere like Daytona,Road America, or Watkins Glen where with all the long straights they should have the upper hand? Just my 2 cents

linzman

I agree that further lowering the weight requirement does not meet the objective, to lower the amount of ballast. As others have already stated, either put a max on the amount of ballast allowed, or address how it is to be mounted.

will968

I'd really like to see the car weight go down, as it would save on brake, tire wear and give it a little more advantage over the Boxsters, which we're constantly running with. Dropping 100lbs - from new PCA email - though would be expensive for my 968. I could do 50 with modest work on the car and treadmill. 968 is one of the heaviest cars on the grid.

Mike Stach dominated SP3 in a turbo. They pull me in a straight line


These are the proposed weights posted today via email from PCA. They're different from the ones you posted.

SP3


18) -Reduce SP3 weights as follows:


Model Current weight New weight
944S 2500 2415
944S2 2700 2610
951 2800 2705
951S 3000 2900
968 2900 2800

944Cup

These weights you reference are the first proposed weights sent to me by PCA for comment some weeks back. As previously posted earlier, this set of weights are, in my opinion, unworkable. Impractical to think the 944S can get down to 2415 with a driver. Others have commented here that the 2610 for the S2 is also not practical when you include driver weights when over 200 lbs. Will your reply indicates the proposed 100 lbs reduction would be expensive for the 968.

The chart of weights posted earlier here, are the weights I proposed back to PCA, if it were deemed for safety reasons a weight reduction is required. However, looking at the larger picture, all PCA Club Race classes, I contend the problem and solution is a much broader issue than SP3.

PCA is considering the original proposal to drop SP3 weights with the justification being that some cars are caring too much ballast to be safe. So safety is the issue being raised. The proposal is not based on a need to better balance the performance in the class.

The idea of lowering weights to improve the overall performance of a race car has merit. Over the years the SP3 weights have been gradually lowered to do just that. Makes these models better race cars. For example, the S2 is almost 300 lbs lighter than its counter part in PCA E class. There just comes a point where further reductions create more problems than they fix.

944Cup

Last year Brandon Collins set fast lap in both races at the 944 Cup Nationals at Daytona driving a 944 Turbo. He won the first race and started on the pole for Nationals and was leading the 2nd race when the motor broke.

will968

Thanks for advocating us! I like your proposal much better

944Cup

Thank you.

Giving back to a sport which have has given much to me and in memory of my Dad who got me started in PCA and racing way back when

944Cup

2020 Rules Proposals for Comment

Racers are invited to send comment on these rules proposals through August 18th, 2019 to rules@pcaclubracing.org. Click on the address link to use your own e-mail client to compose and send the message. All members of the Rules Committee have access to e-mails sent using that address.

It helps if comments in any single e-mail are limited to one class. Racers may comment on rules for more than one class, of course, but please do so in separate e-mails. This helps the rules chair a great deal when collating them for committee review.

944Cup

2020 rules will be issued shortly by PCA. Expect no change in the minimum car weights for SP3.

Also expect clarification on the rules regarding body venting and scoops, leaning towards for more restrictive language. This subject rule receives numerous questions each year, so a clarification was needed.